Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Avoiding the question approach: making direct comments in manuscript reviews

S H Johnson

    Nurse Author & Editor
    |January 1, 1995
    PubMed
    Summary

    Manuscript reviewers should provide clear directions, not questions, to help authors revise effectively. This improves manuscript quality and aids editors in publication decisions.

    Related Concept Videos

    You might also read

    Related Articles

    Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

    Sort by
    Same author

    Chromoplectic TPM3-ALK rearrangement in a patient with inflammatory myofibroblastic tumor who responded to ceritinib after progression on crizotinib.

    Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology·2016
    Same author

    Activation of TAK1 by MYD88 L265P drives malignant B-cell Growth in non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

    Blood cancer journal·2014
    Same author

    Selective activation of a parietofrontal circuit during implicitly imagined prehension.

    NeuroImage·2002
    Same author

    End-of-life decision making: what we don't know, we make up; what we do know, we ignore.

    Indiana law review·2002
    Same author

    Refining outlining skills. Part II: The computer method.

    AAOHN journal : official journal of the American Association of Occupational Health Nurses·2002
    Same author

    Seeing two sides at once: effects of viewpoint and object structure on recognizing three-dimensional objects.

    Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance·2002

    Area of Science:

    • Scientific publishing
    • Manuscript review process
    • Academic communication

    Background:

    • Manuscript reviews often contain questions, leaving authors uncertain about necessary revisions.
    • Unclear reviewer feedback hinders the manuscript revision process and impacts publication quality.

    Purpose of the Study:

    • To provide guidance for manuscript reviewers and authors on crafting and interpreting review comments.
    • To promote constructive feedback that facilitates manuscript improvement and publication.

    Main Methods:

    • Analysis of common reviewer comment types (questions vs. directives).
    • Development of best practices for reviewer feedback and author response.

    Main Results:

    • Directives from reviewers are more effective than questions for guiding manuscript revisions.
    • Clear comments enhance author understanding and expedite the revision process.

    Conclusions:

    • Reviewers should use clear, actionable directives instead of questions to improve manuscript revision efficiency.
    • Effective communication in manuscript reviews is crucial for achieving high-quality scientific publications.

    Related Experiment Videos